Skip to content

A great result for the King of the North and a very bad one for the SNP – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 13,201
edited 7:02AM in General
A great result for the King of the North and a very bad one for the SNP – politicalbetting.com

? | Makerfield Parliamentary By-Election Result:? LAB: 54.8% (+9.6)?? RFM: 34.5% (+2.7)? RES: 6.8% (New)? CON: 2.2% (-8.7)? GRN: 0.7% (-3.7)? LDM: 0.4% (-6.4)?? CBF: 0.2% (New)? MRLP: 0.1% (New)? Others (6): 0.3%Labour HOLD.Changes w/ GE2024.

Read the full story here

«13

Comments

  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 23,400
    First
  • Farage looks angry and is directly telling off people voting for Restore lol
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,974
    SNP held one, could be worse, but I was dead wrong in Aberdeen.

    St Andy was always going to walk it.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 23,400
    A new dawn has broken, has it not…


    For a Kemi!!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,974
    Stereodog said:

    kle4 said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Good luck to the new PM on increasing health, welfare, and defence spending to keep the MPs happy, without any cuts.

    Oh, and whilst reopening the assusted suicide debate.

    Vibes theory of governing being more important may be proven.

    People here constantly emphasise the challenges.

    However its worth noting the upside.

    The new PM is going to have 2.5 years in Downing Street with a landslide majority.

    If you can't make it work with a landslide majority, you don't deserve another term.
    Fair point. The Starmer government seemed bereft of ideas and tentative from the start.

    The MPs want to be led, and they will take chances if they have confidence in who leads them. Andy should go bold and tell them they trusted him to save the party, they need to trust him even if a proposal might sound unpopular. Go big.

    What though? There's no money left, for real this time.
    Not entirely true. Starmer's in love with digital ID and ruinous, technologically deficient authoritarianism,
    Those should be popular with the public tendency, making his unpopularity more notable.
    It'd help if we had a media that wasn't either thick as pigshit or complicit in a desire by the Government to track the proletariat scum and force them to take on digital ID or upload personal documents to do almost anything on the internet.
    A reminder that the ban on Social Media for the young is massively popular:

    https://bsky.app/profile/luketryl.bsky.social/post/3mod7vtcxl22t

    Even 77% of Gen Z agree on how harmful SM is:

    https://bsky.app/profile/luketryl.bsky.social/post/3mod7vvnajk2t
    Stop bloody using it then!
    That's all very well but it would be a bit like someone telling me to stop using WhatsApp. My personal feelings about it don't really matter because so many of my friends and family use it for communicating so I'm pretty much obliged to if I don't want to miss out. That was the major stumbling block when I was trying to switch to a dumb phone. If you're a Gen Z who wants to quit social media but doesn't want to lose out among friends then you need enough of them to also quit.
    That's a fair point, but if it's that level a ban won't work anyway as people will 'need' to workaround it.

    I'm highly skeptical that most who say it is harmful genuinely think that, as at the least they'd use it the bare minimum and no way 77% of Gen Z use it only for those essential social purposes.

  • FF43FF43 Posts: 19,746
    I doubt SNP will lose a lot of sleep over Aberdeen South. Arbroath and Broughty Ferry is a more typical constituency for them and they won it easily.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,974

    Farage looks angry and is directly telling off people voting for Restore lol

    Talk of Uniparty is american nonsense, but there is something in Farage being reasonably mainstream as insurgent parties go. He might rile people up but he's not actually seeking to be revolutionary.

    Indeed in the last year the pretence has been dropped and they've basically admitted they are rebranded Tories. So actual outliers need somewhere to go.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 128,897
    0.2%


    FFS.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 33,696
    edited 7:10AM
    The sixth sick sheikh's seventh sheep just made a comment.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,974
    King in the North.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 25,586
    The Ego has Landed
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 23,045

    Farage looks angry and is directly telling off people voting for Restore lol

    Oh dear how sad never mind.

    The main reason Farage has got where he is is because of his ability to take ex-Conservative voters by being more assertively right wing. Now Restore are doing the same to him.

    Using someone's signature move against them is always funny to watch.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 13,487

    Farage looks angry and is directly telling off people voting for Restore lol

    He should learn to count
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 63,979
    kle4 said:

    King in the North.

    Remind me how that worked out? :p
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,974
    edited 7:16AM

    Stereodog said:

    kle4 said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Good luck to the new PM on increasing health, welfare, and defence spending to keep the MPs happy, without any cuts.

    Oh, and whilst reopening the assusted suicide debate.

    Vibes theory of governing being more important may be proven.

    People here constantly emphasise the challenges.

    However its worth noting the upside.

    The new PM is going to have 2.5 years in Downing Street with a landslide majority.

    If you can't make it work with a landslide majority, you don't deserve another term.
    Fair point. The Starmer government seemed bereft of ideas and tentative from the start.

    The MPs want to be led, and they will take chances if they have confidence in who leads them. Andy should go bold and tell them they trusted him to save the party, they need to trust him even if a proposal might sound unpopular. Go big.

    What though? There's no money left, for real this time.
    Not entirely true. Starmer's in love with digital ID and ruinous, technologically deficient authoritarianism,
    Those should be popular with the public tendency, making his unpopularity more notable.
    It'd help if we had a media that wasn't either thick as pigshit or complicit in a desire by the Government to track the proletariat scum and force them to take on digital ID or upload personal documents to do almost anything on the internet.
    A reminder that the ban on Social Media for the young is massively popular:

    https://bsky.app/profile/luketryl.bsky.social/post/3mod7vtcxl22t

    Even 77% of Gen Z agree on how harmful SM is:

    https://bsky.app/profile/luketryl.bsky.social/post/3mod7vvnajk2t
    Stop bloody using it then!
    That's all very well but it would be a bit like someone telling me to stop using WhatsApp. My personal feelings about it don't really matter because so many of my friends and family use it for communicating so I'm pretty much obliged to if I don't want to miss out. That was the major stumbling block when I was trying to switch to a dumb phone. If you're a Gen Z who wants to quit social media but doesn't want to lose out among friends then you need enough of them to also quit.
    Agreeing that something is, or can be, harmful doesn't mean you have to stop using it. As you point out, it has benefits too.

    I'm not going to stop using SM just as I'm not going to stop drinking either.
    You don't have to, tradeoffs are fine, but if you were choosing to get pissed every night I'd be less sympathetic if you said I should ban it for others because it's bad. People are not helpless, even kids, if they think social media is bad they can restrict how much they use it without needing to quit it altogether. I believe in young people that they can do that.

    (Ok we do ban drink for kids, but that's where the analogy breaks down)
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 7,193
    I wonder if there’s a a paradox emerging, in that when it is clear that voting for them will not put them into Government, left wing voters will vote Tory to prevent something they see as worse? One would think that has implications in the south and midlands unless or until the Tories sound like they’d be willing to facilitate a Farage Government.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 37,120

    0.2%

    FFS.

    What's 0.2%? Inflation? Growth? Return on your bets?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,974

    Farage looks angry and is directly telling off people voting for Restore lol

    Oh dear how sad never mind.

    The main reason Farage has got where he is is because of his ability to take ex-Conservative voters by being more assertively right wing. Now Restore are doing the same to him.

    Using someone's signature move against them is always funny to watch.
    Wait for Lowe to get eclipsed by the ghost of Oswald Mosley?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,974

    0.2%

    FFS.

    What's 0.2%? Inflation? Growth? Return on your bets?
    Count Binface.
  • StereodogStereodog Posts: 1,392
    kle4 said:

    Stereodog said:

    kle4 said:

    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Good luck to the new PM on increasing health, welfare, and defence spending to keep the MPs happy, without any cuts.

    Oh, and whilst reopening the assusted suicide debate.

    Vibes theory of governing being more important may be proven.

    People here constantly emphasise the challenges.

    However its worth noting the upside.

    The new PM is going to have 2.5 years in Downing Street with a landslide majority.

    If you can't make it work with a landslide majority, you don't deserve another term.
    Fair point. The Starmer government seemed bereft of ideas and tentative from the start.

    The MPs want to be led, and they will take chances if they have confidence in who leads them. Andy should go bold and tell them they trusted him to save the party, they need to trust him even if a proposal might sound unpopular. Go big.

    What though? There's no money left, for real this time.
    Not entirely true. Starmer's in love with digital ID and ruinous, technologically deficient authoritarianism,
    Those should be popular with the public tendency, making his unpopularity more notable.
    It'd help if we had a media that wasn't either thick as pigshit or complicit in a desire by the Government to track the proletariat scum and force them to take on digital ID or upload personal documents to do almost anything on the internet.
    A reminder that the ban on Social Media for the young is massively popular:

    https://bsky.app/profile/luketryl.bsky.social/post/3mod7vtcxl22t

    Even 77% of Gen Z agree on how harmful SM is:

    https://bsky.app/profile/luketryl.bsky.social/post/3mod7vvnajk2t
    Stop bloody using it then!
    That's all very well but it would be a bit like someone telling me to stop using WhatsApp. My personal feelings about it don't really matter because so many of my friends and family use it for communicating so I'm pretty much obliged to if I don't want to miss out. That was the major stumbling block when I was trying to switch to a dumb phone. If you're a Gen Z who wants to quit social media but doesn't want to lose out among friends then you need enough of them to also quit.
    That's a fair point, but if it's that level a ban won't work anyway as people will 'need' to workaround it.

    I'm highly skeptical that most who say it is harmful genuinely think that, as at the least they'd use it the bare minimum and no way 77% of Gen Z use it only for those essential social purposes.

    Yes I do agree that there is probably a lot of 'saying what people want to hear' in that figure. In my opinion we should view this problem as one of broadcast regulation rather than getting het up about social media per se. Back in the day, social media was about sharing things in your life and keeping in touch with friends and family. That did cause some problems with cyber bullying etc but it wasn't anywhere near as pernicious for young people than the current state of play. These days Ticktock and the like are content streams where young people watch broadcasts from professional creators. There's very little personal sharing involved. We should view it the same as we would if ITV X suddenly uploaded a load of racist and misogynistic content.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 33,696
    edited 7:20AM
    FPT:
    kle4 said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Morning all! Let’s talk Aberdeen South first. SNP absolutely scunnered by the usual collapse in SNP vote combined with all other party voters going tactical to oust them. Exactly what I was discussing with Tory activists at the Aberdeen count for the Holyrood election a few weeks.

    People like me voting Tory - or them voting Labour or LibDem - is how we stop the nationalist menace. Can I also gently remind our Tory friends on here who rightly want to talk bout how their oil and gas policies won this that their previous policies were the same as SNP and Labour policies…

    Congratulations to James Adams who gets elected to Holyrood in Lumsden’s place.

    I think that over egging it in Aberdeen South. The SNP vote was down 4%, and SLAB down 19% but the turnout was down a massive 28% at 31%.

    So tactical voting, but also voters in Scotland much less interested in Westminster politics than Holyrood, particularly SNP voters.

    I am not convinced this good result for the Tories is generalisable even to other parts of Scotland, let alone the rest of the UK.
    Whilst I don’t disagree, nowhere did I make a suggestion about the rest of the UK or predicted a renaissance of Scottish Toryism. I love the idea of sane parties joining forces to oust the divisive SNP and Reform people, but in Scotland at least that’s easy to say and hard to do.

    Tories won Aberdeen South because they won votes from all non-SNP voters. That’s self evident.
    The Tories won because they fought on a policy that resonated with the voters. A lesson there...

    Plus I suspect that the SNP's mismanagement shenanigans didn't exactly help enthuse their vote to come out.
    Yes, going on the economy is a much better way forward (particularly as Truss fades from memory like some fever dream). Badenoch cannot resist the Culture War clickbait though.
    That was to compete with Reform (in part, I'm sure she is genuine about it). If Reform fade a bit it's less necessary.

    I maintain culture war fights from any side are popular with their voters, you need a bit of it to spice things up, but it cannot be the whole meal.

    That's like Reform being a vindaloo, the Tories a dupiaza, and Restore a plate of dry chilli powder.

    (There's a thread/buzzfeed article for you - whoch party is which curry?)
    I think the huge problem with that thought is that it is not "their voters" they need, but their "former voters".

    I'd say that is a particular problem for Kemi, because the Cons have thrown out most of their one nation wing, and much of the "Jenrick" wing, whatever you want to call it, has also left. Plus they had their worst election result for a century iirc, and they have still not faced that head on.

    They need to build out sideways politically, and Kemi is digging a bigger hole in the same place. In my entirely neutral (ahem !) terms, they have gutted the party and thrown everything away except the noisome entrails. They do have the advantage that Reform, who Kemi still seems to see as her main competitor, are currently on the skids.

    Starmer has a similar problem in some ways, but he is in Government and it will more be determined by (1) If his policies work for groups of voters and (2) Events, dear boy.

    Neither is a wicket upon which I would enjoy playing.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 5,502
    It's really strange to have been watching politics long enough to have witnessed Mr Burnham go from being the leadership candidate of whom many felt He'll do, I suppose to seeing him hailed as the answer to Labour’s prayers.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 37,120
    edited 7:20AM
    biggles said:

    I wonder if there’s a a paradox emerging, in that when it is clear that voting for them will not put them into Government, left wing voters will vote Tory to prevent something they see as worse? One would think that has implications in the south and midlands unless or until the Tories sound like they’d be willing to facilitate a Farage Government.

    I have never voted Tory in my life but I would vote for them tactically if I thought it was necessary to keep Reform out in my constituency (which might well be the case at the next GE). It would be a wrench but I'd do it.

    (Edit: so long as I was 100% confident they would do a deal with Reform - which I'm not currently tbh.)
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 24,473
    Very impressive wins by Andy Burnham and the Oil & Gas party.

    It leaves the Lib Dems as the only main opposition party in England not to have won a by-election in this Parliament. Whatever happened to their fabled by-election machine?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,974
    DougSeal said:

    Pass the smelling salts. JD Vance said something sensible -

    “ You're a country of nine million people. You can't just kill your way out of solving every single national security problem that you have."

    Yes, hypocritical though as he supports his leader making aggressive threats to allies ans launch actual aggression against others. The words apply even though as a much bigger country they can kill many more before it's an issue for them.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 23,045
    FF43 said:

    I doubt SNP will lose a lot of sleep over Aberdeen South. Arbroath and Broughty Ferry is a more typical constituency for them and they won it easily.

    Indeed, there's a risk of taking the wrong lesson from a good result, as happened after Uxbridge.

    Everyone, including Starmer and Burnham, concluded that bring the drivers' friend was the way to go, ignoring the detail that Zone 6 is an unusual bit of London. Chasing that vote was one of the signs of Sunak going mad.

    Potentially, it's the same here, except eking out oil and gas for a bit longer. Obviously plays well in Aberdeen, not sure about nationwide.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 43,605
    @stephenkb.bsky.social‬

    Wow. Burnham beat Farage so badly he isn't even whining about postal votes.

    https://bsky.app/profile/stephenkb.bsky.social/post/3momsdjoai223
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 60,100
    https://x.com/bryndphillips/status/2067674396072837609

    I like Andy Burnham. I once saw him speak at Salford University where he said, “the last time I was here was to watch The Smiths in 1984.” Then, the next time I saw him there, he said the exact same thing again.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,974
    biggles said:

    I wonder if there’s a a paradox emerging, in that when it is clear that voting for them will not put them into Government, left wing voters will vote Tory to prevent something they see as worse? One would think that has implications in the south and midlands unless or until the Tories sound like they’d be willing to facilitate a Farage Government.

    Which they would be.

    Unless they are leading Reform where like in Swindob they'll say no deals with Reform, and trust Reform to come to them and agree a deal anyway.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 37,120
    AnneJGP said:

    It's really strange to have been watching politics long enough to have witnessed Mr Burnham go from being the leadership candidate of whom many felt He'll do, I suppose to seeing him hailed as the answer to Labour’s prayers.

    Hard times - needs must.
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 3,218
    kle4 said:

    Farage looks angry and is directly telling off people voting for Restore lol

    Oh dear how sad never mind.

    The main reason Farage has got where he is is because of his ability to take ex-Conservative voters by being more assertively right wing. Now Restore are doing the same to him.

    Using someone's signature move against them is always funny to watch.
    Wait for Lowe to get eclipsed by the ghost of Oswald Mosley?
    Was the Restore candidate a real person?
    A small business person that very publicly announces they're a racist who wants to deport British citizens with a non-white skin colour. I assume she's been promised a slot on GB news or similar so she doesn't go hungry.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 19,746
    edited 7:24AM
    FF43 said:

    I doubt SNP will lose a lot of sleep over Aberdeen South. Arbroath and Broughty Ferry is a more typical constituency for them and they won it easily.

    I would say, great for Burnham - he has a clear mandate and road to Downing Street.

    Great for Tories - maybe only in Aberdeen but it was a stunning result, take your wins where you can, those have been few and far between

    Bad for Reform, this was one of their most winnable seats. Which in turn should help the Conservatives long term

    Bad for Labour in Scotland. And apart from presumably getting rid of an unpopular leader, maybe elsewhere too with Makerfield being the exception that proves there rule.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 23,045

    https://x.com/bryndphillips/status/2067674396072837609

    I like Andy Burnham. I once saw him speak at Salford University where he said, “the last time I was here was to watch The Smiths in 1984.” Then, the next time I saw him there, he said the exact same thing again.

    Better Barnetted Boris.
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 3,218

    The Ego has Landed

    Manc, he's gone to heaven
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 48,014
    FF43 said:

    I doubt SNP will lose a lot of sleep over Aberdeen South. Arbroath and Broughty Ferry is a more typical constituency for them and they won it easily.

    Come now, the party that has been in charge of British oil and gas for 14 of the last 16 years and is not likely to be in government any where or any time soon has won a by election to defend British oil and gas.
    Exciting times for British oil and gas!
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 24,473

    0.2%

    FFS.

    What's 0.2%? Inflation? Growth? Return on your bets?
    I believe TSE had a long-odds bet on Burnham to win 55-59.9% of the vote, and he was just 0.2pp short.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 5,502

    Farage looks angry and is directly telling off people voting for Restore lol

    Bit pointless of him, the Restore vote was nowhere near enough to make a difference.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 61,911
    So it wasn’t close at all in Makerfield, AB cleaning up and seemingly en route to Downing St in the near future.

    Awesome result for the Tories in Aberdeen, congratulations to Douglas Lumsden MP and there will be a big smile on Kemi Badenoch’s face this morning.

    A busy day awaits, of football, cricket, golf, and laughing at Moscow being on fire.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,056
    AnneJGP said:

    It's really strange to have been watching politics long enough to have witnessed Mr Burnham go from being the leadership candidate of whom many felt He'll do, I suppose to seeing him hailed as the answer to Labour’s prayers.

    Someone who will do is the answer to Labour's prayers, as Starmer clearly won't.
  • I won Burnham to win Makerfield and hope to now win Burnham as next PM
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 3,218

    0.2%

    FFS.

    What's 0.2%? Inflation? Growth? Return on your bets?
    I believe TSE had a long-odds bet on Burnham to win 55-59.9% of the vote, and he was just 0.2pp short.
    Should have stuck to laying Restore over 10%
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 63,979

    0.2%

    FFS.

    What's 0.2%? Inflation? Growth? Return on your bets?
    I had tipped Andy Burnham to poll 55% to 59.99% at tasty odds and he fell short by 0.2%, still it was a profitable night.
    Value losers can sting. Still remember Piastri at long odds in Silverstone a couple of years ago, and Kubica at about 8 for Monaco pole, which he missed by two-thousandths.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 14,399

    FF43 said:

    I doubt SNP will lose a lot of sleep over Aberdeen South. Arbroath and Broughty Ferry is a more typical constituency for them and they won it easily.

    Indeed, there's a risk of taking the wrong lesson from a good result, as happened after Uxbridge.

    Everyone, including Starmer and Burnham, concluded that bring the drivers' friend was the way to go, ignoring the detail that Zone 6 is an unusual bit of London. Chasing that vote was one of the signs of Sunak going mad.

    Potentially, it's the same here, except eking out oil and gas for a bit longer. Obviously plays well in Aberdeen, not sure about nationwide.
    The significant part of the Aberdeen South vote is not the specifics of the message that won over the voters in that particular constituency, but that the voters were willing to vote for the Tories as the vehicle for that message.

    Would be a bit harder for the Tories in England, where Reform are stronger, but it's a major step forward for a party that received such a drubbing less than two years ago.
    Difficult to think of a UK wide message that is as salient as O&G in Aberdeen other than immigration. I’d love it to be business taxes but sadly most people aren’t exposed to it as an issue.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 17,516
    Interesting night, with a set of headline results looking rather old fashioned. Three old/older parties winning in their safe territory. However....

    Three points:

    1) Don't overlook that Reform and Reform+Restore (ie the insurgent right) increased their vote share at Makerfield from 2024. The latter from 32 to 41.

    2) Reform cannot win either 325+ or most seats in a GE. Tactical voting works.

    3) Two weeks ago Kellner said:

    If..there is nothing wrong with the raw sample, then Burnham now has a 22 point lead (leading Kenyon by 56-34 per cent”

    and is sorry he didn't think it mattered as much as it did. Worth a read:

    https://kellnerp.substack.com/p/four-take-aways-from-burnhams-big?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=2975369&post_id=202660063&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1mnpci&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 66,778
    Bet365 slow to settle.

    Presume their political markets guy doesn't start work until 9am.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 128,897

    0.2%

    FFS.

    What's 0.2%? Inflation? Growth? Return on your bets?
    I had tipped Andy Burnham to poll 55% to 59.99% at tasty odds and he fell short by 0.2%, still it was a profitable night.
    Value losers can sting. Still remember Piastri at long odds in Silverstone a couple of years ago, and Kubica at about 8 for Monaco pole, which he missed by two-thousandths.
    Aye.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 128,897
    Not many Babylon 5 fans on PB I see.

    Nobody has spotted my subtle B5 reference.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 9,372
    "The former chancellor Jeremy Hunt was among those who predicted that up to 90,000 children could enter the state sector after the addition of VAT. But the figures from the Department for Education (DfE) actually showed a decline in overall applications for both primary and secondary school places this year, while nearly 85% of families received their first choice of secondary school place, higher than in 2025 and 2024."

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2026/jun/18/vat-private-school-fees-not-caused-pupil-exodus-bridget-phillipson

    So an extra £1.8bn for the ~10m pupils in state schools in UK. £200/student additional funding.
  • Brixian59Brixian59 Posts: 2,395
    Eabhal said:

    FF43 said:

    I doubt SNP will lose a lot of sleep over Aberdeen South. Arbroath and Broughty Ferry is a more typical constituency for them and they won it easily.

    Indeed, there's a risk of taking the wrong lesson from a good result, as happened after Uxbridge.

    Everyone, including Starmer and Burnham, concluded that bring the drivers' friend was the way to go, ignoring the detail that Zone 6 is an unusual bit of London. Chasing that vote was one of the signs of Sunak going mad.

    Potentially, it's the same here, except eking out oil and gas for a bit longer. Obviously plays well in Aberdeen, not sure about nationwide.
    The significant part of the Aberdeen South vote is not the specifics of the message that won over the voters in that particular constituency, but that the voters were willing to vote for the Tories as the vehicle for that message.

    Would be a bit harder for the Tories in England, where Reform are stronger, but it's a major step forward for a party that received such a drubbing less than two years ago.
    Difficult to think of a UK wide message that is as salient as O&G in Aberdeen other than immigration. I’d love it to be business taxes but sadly most people aren’t exposed to it as an issue.
    It's a one off issue in Oil Town

    It's like fishing being the only issue on the ballot paper in Torbay

    Aberdeen needs oil and gas, only the Tories and Reform living in dark ages on that topic

    Of course Kemi has to go to celebrate the win, any Leader would, but it's a strange optic to be as far away from Westminster as you can be, on a day when everyone is focused on Westminster
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,056
    edited 7:39AM
    algarkirk said:

    Interesting night, with a set of headline results looking rather old fashioned. Three old/older parties winning in their safe territory. However....

    Three points:

    1) Don't overlook that Reform and Reform+Restore (ie the insurgent right) increased their vote share at Makerfield from 2024. The latter from 32 to 41..

    Very good point, and a warning to Labour (as were the local elections) if/when Burnham fails to deliver.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 63,979

    Not many Babylon 5 fans on PB I see.

    Nobody has spotted my subtle B5 reference.

    Just started re-watching that (Legend, Freeview 41), That particular quote is not one I immediately recall. I do like the line about treason coming in small packets as well as large ones, when the fascist Night Watch are getting going. Especially relevant now, it seems.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 57,050
    edited 7:45AM

    FF43 said:

    I doubt SNP will lose a lot of sleep over Aberdeen South. Arbroath and Broughty Ferry is a more typical constituency for them and they won it easily.

    Come now, the party that has been in charge of British oil and gas for 14 of the last 16 years and is not likely to be in government any where or any time soon has won a by election to defend British oil and gas.
    Exciting times for British oil and gas!
    I am quite green on environmental issues, but even I can see the sense of extracting the economically useful oil and gas from the North Sea.

    It shouldn't stand in the way of our campaign for renewables and electrification which is the obvious future for both energy needs, jobs and security. It makes no sense when doing carbon accounting to merely substitute it with imported oil and gas.

    We will need fossil fuels for chemical feedstock etc in the long term too.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 66,778

    0.2%

    FFS.

    What's 0.2%? Inflation? Growth? Return on your bets?
    I believe TSE had a long-odds bet on Burnham to win 55-59.9% of the vote, and he was just 0.2pp short.
    I took that too.

    It was a great tip. A very good value loser that almost came off.

    I had £20 on at 12/1
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 61,911

    Not many Babylon 5 fans on PB I see.

    Nobody has spotted my subtle B5 reference.

    I only ever watched the first four.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 19,746

    FF43 said:

    I doubt SNP will lose a lot of sleep over Aberdeen South. Arbroath and Broughty Ferry is a more typical constituency for them and they won it easily.

    Indeed, there's a risk of taking the wrong lesson from a good result, as happened after Uxbridge.

    Everyone, including Starmer and Burnham, concluded that bring the drivers' friend was the way to go, ignoring the detail that Zone 6 is an unusual bit of London. Chasing that vote was one of the signs of Sunak going mad.

    Potentially, it's the same here, except eking out oil and gas for a bit longer. Obviously plays well in Aberdeen, not sure about nationwide.
    Nobody will bring Aberdeen's glory days back. Geology prevents it even if saving the planet isn't your thing. But it's an emotional thing. People who made a good living out of the oil boom no longer do. Kemi Badenoch is playing the unlikely role of Arthur Scargill in his opposition to an unfeeling Margaret Thatcher towards the miners.
  • theProletheProle Posts: 1,979
    rkrkrk said:

    "The former chancellor Jeremy Hunt was among those who predicted that up to 90,000 children could enter the state sector after the addition of VAT. But the figures from the Department for Education (DfE) actually showed a decline in overall applications for both primary and secondary school places this year, while nearly 85% of families received their first choice of secondary school place, higher than in 2025 and 2024."

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2026/jun/18/vat-private-school-fees-not-caused-pupil-exodus-bridget-phillipson

    So an extra £1.8bn for the ~10m pupils in state schools in UK. £200/student additional funding.

    And what would have happened without VAT on school fees?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,056
    edited 7:43AM

    Not many Babylon 5 fans on PB I see.

    Nobody has spotted my subtle B5 reference.

    If you will put it at the bottom of the header, what do you expect ?
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 3,395
    And in recognition of his expectant demise, SKS has changed the door at No 10 to a revolving one.


  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,056

    Not many Babylon 5 fans on PB I see.

    Nobody has spotted my subtle B5 reference.

    Just started re-watching that (Legend, Freeview 41), That particular quote is not one I immediately recall. I do like the line about treason coming in small packets as well as large ones, when the fascist Night Watch are getting going. Especially relevant now, it seems.
    TSE has used it before.
    I'm not 100% convinced it applies in a democracy.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 57,050

    0.2%

    FFS.

    What's 0.2%? Inflation? Growth? Return on your bets?
    I believe TSE had a long-odds bet on Burnham to win 55-59.9% of the vote, and he was just 0.2pp short.
    I took that too.

    It was a great tip. A very good value loser that almost came off.

    I had £20 on at 12/1
    I lost that too, and on Restore losing their deposit, but am up on the night overall, as I backed Burnham 50-54.99% at 4/1 and also over 43.5% at 1.73.

    I didn't bet on the Scottish byelections, as didn't think much value there.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 63,833
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    I doubt SNP will lose a lot of sleep over Aberdeen South. Arbroath and Broughty Ferry is a more typical constituency for them and they won it easily.

    Indeed, there's a risk of taking the wrong lesson from a good result, as happened after Uxbridge.

    Everyone, including Starmer and Burnham, concluded that bring the drivers' friend was the way to go, ignoring the detail that Zone 6 is an unusual bit of London. Chasing that vote was one of the signs of Sunak going mad.

    Potentially, it's the same here, except eking out oil and gas for a bit longer. Obviously plays well in Aberdeen, not sure about nationwide.
    Nobody will bring Aberdeen's glory days back. Geology prevents it even if saving the planet isn't your thing. But it's an emotional thing. People who made a good living out of the oil boom no longer do. Kemi Badenoch is playing the unlikely role of Arthur Scargill in his opposition to an unfeeling Margaret Thatcher towards the miners.
    Collapsing the industry there, with high energy prices, is especially stupid.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 55,545
    Was this also another failure by the pollsters? Yes, there were polls pointing toward a Labour win of up to 10%, but not the 20% margin actually achieved, and I don't recall any polls suggesting the Tories were ahead in Aberdeen, let alone by so much?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 128,897
    IanB2 said:

    Was this also another failure by the pollsters? Yes, there were polls pointing toward a Labour win of up to 10%, but not the 20% margin actually achieved, and I don't recall any polls suggesting the Tories were ahead in Aberdeen, let alone by so much?

    I don't think there were any Scottish by-election polls.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,056
    Well at least he's unlikely to be Labour's Liz Truss.

    Burnham brings in top economists before possible leadership run
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/jun/18/andy-burnham-top-economists-possible-leadership-run
    ..Burnham is understood to be getting advice from Andy Haldane, a former Bank of England chief economist, as well as Richard Hughes, a former chair of the Office for Budget Responsibility and Jim O’Neill, a crossbench peer and former Treasury minister who worked on George Osborne’s “Northern Powerhouse”..
  • Shy Labour voters or shy Burnham voters
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 72,344
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    I doubt SNP will lose a lot of sleep over Aberdeen South. Arbroath and Broughty Ferry is a more typical constituency for them and they won it easily.

    Indeed, there's a risk of taking the wrong lesson from a good result, as happened after Uxbridge.

    Everyone, including Starmer and Burnham, concluded that bring the drivers' friend was the way to go, ignoring the detail that Zone 6 is an unusual bit of London. Chasing that vote was one of the signs of Sunak going mad.

    Potentially, it's the same here, except eking out oil and gas for a bit longer. Obviously plays well in Aberdeen, not sure about nationwide.
    Nobody will bring Aberdeen's glory days back. Geology prevents it even if saving the planet isn't your thing. But it's an emotional thing. People who made a good living out of the oil boom no longer do. Kemi Badenoch is playing the unlikely role of Arthur Scargill in his opposition to an unfeeling Margaret Thatcher towards the miners.
    There is 25 billion of tax income from Kemi's policy which we are not receiving due to dogma, whilst at the same time Norway extracts the oil and gas and tax from it's fields around ours

    It is not either or but both, maximise tax from extracting oil and gas and continue the transition to net zero

    North sea oil and gas exploration will be very much on Burnham's agenda and significantly Wes Streeting is on the same page as Kemi
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 55,545

    Very impressive wins by Andy Burnham and the Oil & Gas party.

    It leaves the Lib Dems as the only main opposition party in England not to have won a by-election in this Parliament. Whatever happened to their fabled by-election machine?

    Its resting
  • MustaphaMondeoMustaphaMondeo Posts: 554

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    I doubt SNP will lose a lot of sleep over Aberdeen South. Arbroath and Broughty Ferry is a more typical constituency for them and they won it easily.

    Indeed, there's a risk of taking the wrong lesson from a good result, as happened after Uxbridge.

    Everyone, including Starmer and Burnham, concluded that bring the drivers' friend was the way to go, ignoring the detail that Zone 6 is an unusual bit of London. Chasing that vote was one of the signs of Sunak going mad.

    Potentially, it's the same here, except eking out oil and gas for a bit longer. Obviously plays well in Aberdeen, not sure about nationwide.
    Nobody will bring Aberdeen's glory days back. Geology prevents it even if saving the planet isn't your thing. But it's an emotional thing. People who made a good living out of the oil boom no longer do. Kemi Badenoch is playing the unlikely role of Arthur Scargill in his opposition to an unfeeling Margaret Thatcher towards the miners.
    There is 25 billion of tax income from Kemi's policy which we are not receiving due to dogma, whilst at the same time Norway extracts the oil and gas and tax from it's fields around ours

    It is not either or but both, maximise tax from extracting oil and gas and continue the transition to net zero

    North sea oil and gas exploration will be very much on Burnham's agenda and significantly Wes Streeting is on the same page as Kemi

    And fuck the planet.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 17,516
    IanB2 said:

    Was this also another failure by the pollsters? Yes, there were polls pointing toward a Labour win of up to 10%, but not the 20% margin actually achieved, and I don't recall any polls suggesting the Tories were ahead in Aberdeen, let alone by so much?

    See the Kellner analysis which is informative, revealing and fairly humble about what proved to be accurate data being analysed and adjusted out of sight:

    https://kellnerp.substack.com/p/four-take-aways-from-burnhams-big?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=2975369&post_id=202660063&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1mnpci&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,974

    Not many Babylon 5 fans on PB I see.

    Nobody has spotted my subtle B5 reference.

    I've started rewatching it this past 2 weeks in fact. But need to refresh my knowledge.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 14,399

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    I doubt SNP will lose a lot of sleep over Aberdeen South. Arbroath and Broughty Ferry is a more typical constituency for them and they won it easily.

    Indeed, there's a risk of taking the wrong lesson from a good result, as happened after Uxbridge.

    Everyone, including Starmer and Burnham, concluded that bring the drivers' friend was the way to go, ignoring the detail that Zone 6 is an unusual bit of London. Chasing that vote was one of the signs of Sunak going mad.

    Potentially, it's the same here, except eking out oil and gas for a bit longer. Obviously plays well in Aberdeen, not sure about nationwide.
    Nobody will bring Aberdeen's glory days back. Geology prevents it even if saving the planet isn't your thing. But it's an emotional thing. People who made a good living out of the oil boom no longer do. Kemi Badenoch is playing the unlikely role of Arthur Scargill in his opposition to an unfeeling Margaret Thatcher towards the miners.
    There is 25 billion of tax income from Kemi's policy which we are not receiving due to dogma, whilst at the same time Norway extracts the oil and gas and tax from it's fields around ours

    It is not either or but both, maximise tax from extracting oil and gas and continue the transition to net zero

    North sea oil and gas exploration will be very much on Burnham's agenda and significantly Wes Streeting is on the same page as Kemi
    We’ve repeatedly debunked the £25 billion figure BigG.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 55,545

    I am optimistic about the UK now.

    We're going to have a Cambridge man as PM again, we've seen the other lot make a mess of things and we're going to fix that.

    And about time too, we haven't had one of our guys at the top for much longer than Isis Poly hasn't won the boat race
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 72,344
    edited 7:53AM

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    I doubt SNP will lose a lot of sleep over Aberdeen South. Arbroath and Broughty Ferry is a more typical constituency for them and they won it easily.

    Indeed, there's a risk of taking the wrong lesson from a good result, as happened after Uxbridge.

    Everyone, including Starmer and Burnham, concluded that bring the drivers' friend was the way to go, ignoring the detail that Zone 6 is an unusual bit of London. Chasing that vote was one of the signs of Sunak going mad.

    Potentially, it's the same here, except eking out oil and gas for a bit longer. Obviously plays well in Aberdeen, not sure about nationwide.
    Nobody will bring Aberdeen's glory days back. Geology prevents it even if saving the planet isn't your thing. But it's an emotional thing. People who made a good living out of the oil boom no longer do. Kemi Badenoch is playing the unlikely role of Arthur Scargill in his opposition to an unfeeling Margaret Thatcher towards the miners.
    There is 25 billion of tax income from Kemi's policy which we are not receiving due to dogma, whilst at the same time Norway extracts the oil and gas and tax from it's fields around ours

    It is not either or but both, maximise tax from extracting oil and gas and continue the transition to net zero

    North sea oil and gas exploration will be very much on Burnham's agenda and significantly Wes Streeting is on the same page as Kemi

    And fuck the planet.
    That is simply nonsense

    We are transitioning to net zero but need oil and gas for decades to come

    We are minnows in this story compared to US Russia, and others who completely ignore the issue
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 63,979
    Incidentally, checking some old bets and Garbett[sp] tipped by Mr. Eagles at 61 for next London mayor is down to 9 on Ladbrokes. Hoping to hedge that later.

    Also, I made a tiny bet on the Victoria state election, laying Labor at under evens, then just backed at 3.55. Might try looking at more things like that over the weekend, time permitting (checking polls, starting position, etc). Only a little profit, but it's a nice result given it's an entirely new thing for me.

    And, as mentioned, Norris at 11 each way in Austria is worth contemplating.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 10,154
    kle4 said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Morning all! Let’s talk Aberdeen South first. SNP absolutely scunnered by the usual collapse in SNP vote combined with all other party voters going tactical to oust them. Exactly what I was discussing with Tory activists at the Aberdeen count for the Holyrood election a few weeks.

    People like me voting Tory - or them voting Labour or LibDem - is how we stop the nationalist menace. Can I also gently remind our Tory friends on here who rightly want to talk bout how their oil and gas policies won this that their previous policies were the same as SNP and Labour policies…

    Congratulations to James Adams who gets elected to Holyrood in Lumsden’s place.

    I think that over egging it in Aberdeen South. The SNP vote was down 4%, and SLAB down 19% but the turnout was down a massive 28% at 31%.

    So tactical voting, but also voters in Scotland much less interested in Westminster politics than Holyrood, particularly SNP voters.

    I am not convinced this good result for the Tories is generalisable even to other parts of Scotland, let alone the rest of the UK.
    Whilst I don’t disagree, nowhere did I make a suggestion about the rest of the UK or predicted a renaissance of Scottish Toryism. I love the idea of sane parties joining forces to oust the divisive SNP and Reform people, but in Scotland at least that’s easy to say and hard to do.

    Tories won Aberdeen South because they won votes from all non-SNP voters. That’s self evident.
    The Tories won because they fought on a policy that resonated with the voters. A lesson there...

    Plus I suspect that the SNP's mismanagement shenanigans didn't exactly help enthuse their vote to come out.
    Yes, going on the economy is a much better way forward (particularly as Truss fades from memory like some fever dream). Badenoch cannot resist the Culture War clickbait though.
    That was to compete with Reform (in part, I'm sure she is genuine about it). If Reform fade a bit it's less necessary.

    I maintain culture war fights from any side are popular with their voters, you need a bit of it to spice things up, but it cannot be the whole meal.

    That's like Reform being a vindaloo, the Tories a dupiaza, and Restore a plate of dry chilli powder.

    (There's a thread/buzzfeed article for you - whoch party is which curry?)
    Heh, think that's spot on for Reform and Restore. Tories are surely one of those old British lunchbox 'curries' from the 70s - not quite sure what to do, so some chicken with a bit of curry powder and some sultanas. Labour Tikka Masala - default choice, not really liked but what you choose when you dislike all the others more. Greens saag aloo. Lib Dems a makhani or something, completely bland, inoffensive and pointless, but rich and makes you feel a bit sick if you have too much.
  • Kenyon made some stupid comments but his comments on abortion were truly awful
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 24,473
    IanB2 said:

    Was this also another failure by the pollsters? Yes, there were polls pointing toward a Labour win of up to 10%, but not the 20% margin actually achieved, and I don't recall any polls suggesting the Tories were ahead in Aberdeen, let alone by so much?

    One of the pollsters did point out that respondents to the poll might have been giving their past vote for the 2024 Mayoral election, rather than the GE, and thus the polls would have been downweighting Burnham voters.

    That would be a reassuring explanation for the discrepancy.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 10,154
    Foxy said:

    FF43 said:

    I doubt SNP will lose a lot of sleep over Aberdeen South. Arbroath and Broughty Ferry is a more typical constituency for them and they won it easily.

    Come now, the party that has been in charge of British oil and gas for 14 of the last 16 years and is not likely to be in government any where or any time soon has won a by election to defend British oil and gas.
    Exciting times for British oil and gas!
    I am quite green on environmental issues, but even I can see the sense of extracting the economically useful oil and gas from the North Sea.

    It shouldn't stand in the way of our campaign for renewables and electrification which is the obvious future for both energy needs, jobs and security. It makes no sense when doing carbon accounting to merely substitute it with imported oil and gas.

    We will need fossil fuels for chemical feedstock etc in the long term too.
    The smart thing would be to crack on as long as there's domestic demand (at least) but ringfence all the tax for low carbon power generation/transport and/or energy saving schemes.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 72,344
    edited 7:59AM
    Eabhal said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    I doubt SNP will lose a lot of sleep over Aberdeen South. Arbroath and Broughty Ferry is a more typical constituency for them and they won it easily.

    Indeed, there's a risk of taking the wrong lesson from a good result, as happened after Uxbridge.

    Everyone, including Starmer and Burnham, concluded that bring the drivers' friend was the way to go, ignoring the detail that Zone 6 is an unusual bit of London. Chasing that vote was one of the signs of Sunak going mad.

    Potentially, it's the same here, except eking out oil and gas for a bit longer. Obviously plays well in Aberdeen, not sure about nationwide.
    Nobody will bring Aberdeen's glory days back. Geology prevents it even if saving the planet isn't your thing. But it's an emotional thing. People who made a good living out of the oil boom no longer do. Kemi Badenoch is playing the unlikely role of Arthur Scargill in his opposition to an unfeeling Margaret Thatcher towards the miners.
    There is 25 billion of tax income from Kemi's policy which we are not receiving due to dogma, whilst at the same time Norway extracts the oil and gas and tax from it's fields around ours

    It is not either or but both, maximise tax from extracting oil and gas and continue the transition to net zero

    North sea oil and gas exploration will be very much on Burnham's agenda and significantly Wes Streeting is on the same page as Kemi
    We’ve repeatedly debunked the £25 billion figure BigG.
    No you haven't

    We gain tax from more exploration which is not being paid at present at an estimate of 2.5 billion pa

    https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/aberdeen-aberdeenshire/7041486/offshore-energies-north-sea-windfall-tax-changes/
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 18,586
    Nigelb said:

    Well at least he's unlikely to be Labour's Liz Truss.

    Burnham brings in top economists before possible leadership run
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/jun/18/andy-burnham-top-economists-possible-leadership-run
    ..Burnham is understood to be getting advice from Andy Haldane, a former Bank of England chief economist, as well as Richard Hughes, a former chair of the Office for Budget Responsibility and Jim O’Neill, a crossbench peer and former Treasury minister who worked on George Osborne’s “Northern Powerhouse”..

    That's a good mix of people.
  • DoctorGDoctorG Posts: 787
    Morning,

    Good result for Tories in Aberdeen South, well done Andy JS and all who backed them there. Whilst I thought the SNP were favourites, I didn't think there would be much in it either way. In the end up Douglas Lumsden won easily. The Tories are still very strong in the north east and were close in both the equivalent seat here and Aberdeenshire East at Holyrood against a backdrop of losing votes in Scotland.

    I think there are several factors at play, obviously oil and gas, its quite a pro business seat, so not as typical of other urban seats with a high student or young population. The SNP have had a poor 6 weeks at Holyrood, which haven't helped, and Reform are starting to decline.

    Labour are very weak in Scotland just now, Anas Sarwar may step down at some point, however the bigger issue is their UK leader is now very clearly done, but won't go either quickly or easily. He may get 2 years in office, but surely not much more than that. Will SKS last as long as the leader's speech at conference?

    Going forward it feels more like a Hartlepool moment for Reform, and it wouldn't surprise me if they have peaked. Burnham can shore up the working class vote much better than Starmer, and a non London based leader should be in their interests.

    If Burnham fights the leadership and wins, I think he will be the first UK Lab leader based in a non London seat since Ed M.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 18,586
    theProle said:

    rkrkrk said:

    "The former chancellor Jeremy Hunt was among those who predicted that up to 90,000 children could enter the state sector after the addition of VAT. But the figures from the Department for Education (DfE) actually showed a decline in overall applications for both primary and secondary school places this year, while nearly 85% of families received their first choice of secondary school place, higher than in 2025 and 2024."

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2026/jun/18/vat-private-school-fees-not-caused-pupil-exodus-bridget-phillipson

    So an extra £1.8bn for the ~10m pupils in state schools in UK. £200/student additional funding.

    And what would have happened without VAT on school fees?
    They wouldn't have had the additional £1.8bn in VAT.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 6,376
    DavidL said:

    So, is Burnham going to play the long game and wait till next week before he removes Starmer or is he going to go for it now?

    A government that has been largely paralysed by indecision since it was elected has fallen into chaos over the last few weeks, reduced to Starmer strutting about at international conferences promising we will help with non existent forces. For the sake of the country I hope Burnham gets on with it. We need purpose and a sense of direction. It has been sorely lacking.

    Perhaps. But is it better to have no direction, or the wrong direction?

    I fear we may be about to find out.

    Burnham has given no sign that he has any idea how to solve the country's many problems than Starmer does. And he will probably make some key ones, especially economic ones, even worse.

    He loves gimmicks, needs to throw the left of the party multiple bones, there's no money to pay for them and he will damage economic growth even more by raising taxes.

    So by next year we may be pining for Starmer.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 19,746
    edited 8:03AM

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    I doubt SNP will lose a lot of sleep over Aberdeen South. Arbroath and Broughty Ferry is a more typical constituency for them and they won it easily.

    Indeed, there's a risk of taking the wrong lesson from a good result, as happened after Uxbridge.

    Everyone, including Starmer and Burnham, concluded that bring the drivers' friend was the way to go, ignoring the detail that Zone 6 is an unusual bit of London. Chasing that vote was one of the signs of Sunak going mad.

    Potentially, it's the same here, except eking out oil and gas for a bit longer. Obviously plays well in Aberdeen, not sure about nationwide.
    Nobody will bring Aberdeen's glory days back. Geology prevents it even if saving the planet isn't your thing. But it's an emotional thing. People who made a good living out of the oil boom no longer do. Kemi Badenoch is playing the unlikely role of Arthur Scargill in his opposition to an unfeeling Margaret Thatcher towards the miners.
    Collapsing the industry there, with high energy prices, is especially stupid.
    We're talking about extracting maybe 5% more out of North Sea than we would otherwise do when production is reducing by about a third every five years. I think we should do it but it's irrelevant in the scheme of things. The future is elsewhere.

    The industry is collapsing mainly because there's no more commercially viable oil and gas left
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 18,586

    I am optimistic about the UK now.

    We're going to have a Cambridge man as PM again, we've seen the other lot make a mess of things and we're going to fix that.

    Good point. About time we had one of our chaps in. This is the sort of radical change we have been looking for.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 81,188
    A great result for common sense in Aberdeen.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 17,516
    Arguably Makerfield is an excellent result for the Tories. Reason: For the Tories to recover they have to be the main contender Right of Centre, where all polling suggests half the votes go.

    This is how it happens: Labour takes support away from the Far Right. The Far Right starts internal feuding. The Tories look respectable and find a few people who look like a government in waiting and suggest some sensible ideas. Votes drift back to the Tories from the Far Right, along with some support from those who have lent their support to Labour. The Tories so position themselves that it is safe to vote for them affirmatively and tactically to keep the Far Right out. (They need to do more on this soon.)

    not enough to put them in government but enough to survive and fight another day.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 55,545
    edited 8:08AM
    algarkirk said:

    IanB2 said:

    Was this also another failure by the pollsters? Yes, there were polls pointing toward a Labour win of up to 10%, but not the 20% margin actually achieved, and I don't recall any polls suggesting the Tories were ahead in Aberdeen, let alone by so much?

    See the Kellner analysis which is informative, revealing and fairly humble about what proved to be accurate data being analysed and adjusted out of sight:

    https://kellnerp.substack.com/p/four-take-aways-from-burnhams-big?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=2975369&post_id=202660063&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1mnpci&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
    Some interesting "long time since's" in his analysis.

    Biggest rise in by-election turnout, from the GE prior, since Torrington 1958

    First actual rise in Labour vote total in a by-election since Hull N in 1966.

    First by-election winner to (likely) go on to mount a leadership challenge since Tony Benn in 1984.

    The TLDR of the rest of it appears to be that you can't rely on, and hence shouldn't weight using, people's recollection of how they voted last time.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 72,344
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    I doubt SNP will lose a lot of sleep over Aberdeen South. Arbroath and Broughty Ferry is a more typical constituency for them and they won it easily.

    Indeed, there's a risk of taking the wrong lesson from a good result, as happened after Uxbridge.

    Everyone, including Starmer and Burnham, concluded that bring the drivers' friend was the way to go, ignoring the detail that Zone 6 is an unusual bit of London. Chasing that vote was one of the signs of Sunak going mad.

    Potentially, it's the same here, except eking out oil and gas for a bit longer. Obviously plays well in Aberdeen, not sure about nationwide.
    Nobody will bring Aberdeen's glory days back. Geology prevents it even if saving the planet isn't your thing. But it's an emotional thing. People who made a good living out of the oil boom no longer do. Kemi Badenoch is playing the unlikely role of Arthur Scargill in his opposition to an unfeeling Margaret Thatcher towards the miners.
    Collapsing the industry there, with high energy prices, is especially stupid.
    We're talking about extracting maybe 5% more out of North Sea than we would otherwise do when production is reducing by about a third every five years. I think we should do it but it's irrelevant in the scheme of things. The future is elsewhere.
    The point that is being missed is we should maximise our own oil and gas whilst transitioning to the future

    Indeed I expect Burnham will authorise the continuing development of the North Sea
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 14,399

    Eabhal said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    I doubt SNP will lose a lot of sleep over Aberdeen South. Arbroath and Broughty Ferry is a more typical constituency for them and they won it easily.

    Indeed, there's a risk of taking the wrong lesson from a good result, as happened after Uxbridge.

    Everyone, including Starmer and Burnham, concluded that bring the drivers' friend was the way to go, ignoring the detail that Zone 6 is an unusual bit of London. Chasing that vote was one of the signs of Sunak going mad.

    Potentially, it's the same here, except eking out oil and gas for a bit longer. Obviously plays well in Aberdeen, not sure about nationwide.
    Nobody will bring Aberdeen's glory days back. Geology prevents it even if saving the planet isn't your thing. But it's an emotional thing. People who made a good living out of the oil boom no longer do. Kemi Badenoch is playing the unlikely role of Arthur Scargill in his opposition to an unfeeling Margaret Thatcher towards the miners.
    There is 25 billion of tax income from Kemi's policy which we are not receiving due to dogma, whilst at the same time Norway extracts the oil and gas and tax from it's fields around ours

    It is not either or but both, maximise tax from extracting oil and gas and continue the transition to net zero

    North sea oil and gas exploration will be very much on Burnham's agenda and significantly Wes Streeting is on the same page as Kemi
    We’ve repeatedly debunked the £25 billion figure BigG.
    No you haven't

    We gain tax from more exploration which is not being paid at present at an estimate of 2.5 billion pa
    Yes I have and it’s very silly to repeatedly come to a forum like PB with it. OEUK, which is the O&G lobby, reckon it’s about £1.5 billion per annum assuming full liberalisation of licensing and large cuts to EPL.

    Their own model suggests a significant reduction in tax revenue while we wait for O&G activity to bump up a bit (in relative terms - it will still be declining in line with the overall trend). The implied future revenue is all indirect - payroll, supply chain etc. That subject to an awful lot of uncertainty.

    I’m not against this but it doesn’t help the cause suggesting that there is significant cash available here - a 0.14% increase in tax revenue over a decade, and that’s a very optimistic estimate.
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 3,218

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    I doubt SNP will lose a lot of sleep over Aberdeen South. Arbroath and Broughty Ferry is a more typical constituency for them and they won it easily.

    Indeed, there's a risk of taking the wrong lesson from a good result, as happened after Uxbridge.

    Everyone, including Starmer and Burnham, concluded that bring the drivers' friend was the way to go, ignoring the detail that Zone 6 is an unusual bit of London. Chasing that vote was one of the signs of Sunak going mad.

    Potentially, it's the same here, except eking out oil and gas for a bit longer. Obviously plays well in Aberdeen, not sure about nationwide.
    Nobody will bring Aberdeen's glory days back. Geology prevents it even if saving the planet isn't your thing. But it's an emotional thing. People who made a good living out of the oil boom no longer do. Kemi Badenoch is playing the unlikely role of Arthur Scargill in his opposition to an unfeeling Margaret Thatcher towards the miners.
    There is 25 billion of tax income from Kemi's policy which we are not receiving due to dogma, whilst at the same time Norway extracts the oil and gas and tax from it's fields around ours

    It is not either or but both, maximise tax from extracting oil and gas and continue the transition to net zero

    North sea oil and gas exploration will be very much on Burnham's agenda and significantly Wes Streeting is on the same page as Kemi

    And fuck the planet.
    That is simply nonsense

    We are transitioning to net zero but need oil and gas for decades to come

    We are minnows in this story compared to US Russia, and others who completely ignore the issue
    £25bn? Is there an actual financial analysis supporting that?
    OEUK are only claiming £13bn of which most (£10bn) is PAYE
    https://oeuk.org.uk/boosting-north-sea-investment-could-generate-13-4-billion-to-eliminate-fuel-poverty-and-add-an-additional-60-billion-to-the-uk-economy/

    other briefings are less optimistic
    https://www.upliftuk.org/post/the-declining-economics-of-the-north-sea
    Financial analysis
    https://ageoftransformation.org/britains-rightwing-want-to-drill-for-nothing-in-the-north-sea/
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 14,399
    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    I doubt SNP will lose a lot of sleep over Aberdeen South. Arbroath and Broughty Ferry is a more typical constituency for them and they won it easily.

    Indeed, there's a risk of taking the wrong lesson from a good result, as happened after Uxbridge.

    Everyone, including Starmer and Burnham, concluded that bring the drivers' friend was the way to go, ignoring the detail that Zone 6 is an unusual bit of London. Chasing that vote was one of the signs of Sunak going mad.

    Potentially, it's the same here, except eking out oil and gas for a bit longer. Obviously plays well in Aberdeen, not sure about nationwide.
    Nobody will bring Aberdeen's glory days back. Geology prevents it even if saving the planet isn't your thing. But it's an emotional thing. People who made a good living out of the oil boom no longer do. Kemi Badenoch is playing the unlikely role of Arthur Scargill in his opposition to an unfeeling Margaret Thatcher towards the miners.
    There is 25 billion of tax income from Kemi's policy which we are not receiving due to dogma, whilst at the same time Norway extracts the oil and gas and tax from it's fields around ours

    It is not either or but both, maximise tax from extracting oil and gas and continue the transition to net zero

    North sea oil and gas exploration will be very much on Burnham's agenda and significantly Wes Streeting is on the same page as Kemi
    We’ve repeatedly debunked the £25 billion figure BigG.
    No you haven't

    We gain tax from more exploration which is not being paid at present at an estimate of 2.5 billion pa
    Yes I have and it’s very silly to repeatedly come to a forum like PB with it. OEUK, which is the O&G lobby, reckon it’s about £1.5 billion per annum assuming full liberalisation of licensing and large cuts to EPL.

    Their own model suggests a significant reduction in tax revenue while we wait for O&G activity to bump up a bit (in relative terms - it will still be declining in line with the overall trend). The implied future revenue is all indirect - payroll, supply chain etc. That subject to an awful lot of uncertainty.

    I’m not against this but it doesn’t help the cause suggesting that there is significant cash available here - a 0.14% increase in tax revenue over a decade, and that’s a very optimistic estimate.
    (I’ve saved this down to save me typing it down every 6 weeks).
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 19,746

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    I doubt SNP will lose a lot of sleep over Aberdeen South. Arbroath and Broughty Ferry is a more typical constituency for them and they won it easily.

    Indeed, there's a risk of taking the wrong lesson from a good result, as happened after Uxbridge.

    Everyone, including Starmer and Burnham, concluded that bring the drivers' friend was the way to go, ignoring the detail that Zone 6 is an unusual bit of London. Chasing that vote was one of the signs of Sunak going mad.

    Potentially, it's the same here, except eking out oil and gas for a bit longer. Obviously plays well in Aberdeen, not sure about nationwide.
    Nobody will bring Aberdeen's glory days back. Geology prevents it even if saving the planet isn't your thing. But it's an emotional thing. People who made a good living out of the oil boom no longer do. Kemi Badenoch is playing the unlikely role of Arthur Scargill in his opposition to an unfeeling Margaret Thatcher towards the miners.
    There is 25 billion of tax income from Kemi's policy which we are not receiving due to dogma, whilst at the same time Norway extracts the oil and gas and tax from it's fields around ours

    It is not either or but both, maximise tax from extracting oil and gas and continue the transition to net zero

    North sea oil and gas exploration will be very much on Burnham's agenda and significantly Wes Streeting is on the same page as Kemi
    There is exactly £0 additional tax revenue from Kemi's policy. Actually it's a net cost as the exploitation will need to be subsidised. It may be worth the subsidy but let's be real.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 28,106
    Nigelb said:

    Well at least he's unlikely to be Labour's Liz Truss.

    Burnham brings in top economists before possible leadership run
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/jun/18/andy-burnham-top-economists-possible-leadership-run
    ..Burnham is understood to be getting advice from Andy Haldane, a former Bank of England chief economist, as well as Richard Hughes, a former chair of the Office for Budget Responsibility and Jim O’Neill, a crossbench peer and former Treasury minister who worked on George Osborne’s “Northern Powerhouse”..

    Pretty sure they will tell them there is no effing money. Then what? He has won as a change candidate and will be unable to afford the changes he (and the country) wants. Back in the same mess by next summer.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 28,927

    https://x.com/bryndphillips/status/2067674396072837609

    I like Andy Burnham. I once saw him speak at Salford University where he said, “the last time I was here was to watch The Smiths in 1984.” Then, the next time I saw him there, he said the exact same thing again.

    Bigmouth strikes again, but what difference does it make?

    Starmer is waking up saying heaven knows I'm miserable now, as I know its over.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 14,399

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    I doubt SNP will lose a lot of sleep over Aberdeen South. Arbroath and Broughty Ferry is a more typical constituency for them and they won it easily.

    Indeed, there's a risk of taking the wrong lesson from a good result, as happened after Uxbridge.

    Everyone, including Starmer and Burnham, concluded that bring the drivers' friend was the way to go, ignoring the detail that Zone 6 is an unusual bit of London. Chasing that vote was one of the signs of Sunak going mad.

    Potentially, it's the same here, except eking out oil and gas for a bit longer. Obviously plays well in Aberdeen, not sure about nationwide.
    Nobody will bring Aberdeen's glory days back. Geology prevents it even if saving the planet isn't your thing. But it's an emotional thing. People who made a good living out of the oil boom no longer do. Kemi Badenoch is playing the unlikely role of Arthur Scargill in his opposition to an unfeeling Margaret Thatcher towards the miners.
    Collapsing the industry there, with high energy prices, is especially stupid.
    We're talking about extracting maybe 5% more out of North Sea than we would otherwise do when production is reducing by about a third every five years. I think we should do it but it's irrelevant in the scheme of things. The future is elsewhere.
    The point that is being missed is we should maximise our own oil and gas whilst transitioning to the future

    Indeed I expect Burnham will authorise the continuing development of the North Sea
    Maximise? Who’s paying the subsidy that would allow that?

    Surely you mean economically viable.
Sign In or Register to comment.